E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
SKY NEWS AM AGENDA
THURSDAY, 21 FEBRUARY 2019
 
SUBJECTS: Joe Hockey; Inquiry needed into Liberals’ Helloworld scandal; renewable energy; coal; mortgage brokers
 
LAURA JAYES: Joining us now is the Shadow Finance Minister, Jim Chalmers. Could I ask you about Joe Hockey and his role of ambassador. Would you really dump him immediately if you won the election without putting in place your own investigation?
 
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW MINISTER FOR FINANCE: Ambassadorial appointments, as you know know, are for the Government of the day. But Joe Hockey does have some very serious questions to answer here for his role in the Helloworld scandal. But it's also a test of Scott Morrison. Scott Morrison shouldn't leave the Parliamentary building today without launching a full investigation into what's gone on here, the role of Joe Hockey, the role of Mathias Cormann, the potential role of other ministers in the Morrison Government.
 
JAYES: What are you asserting though? 
 
CHALMERS: There are facts on the table already. We have a company, Helloworld, which is the beneficiary of a multi-million dollar Government contract. Joe Hockey is a shareholder in the company. The company is run by someone who's donated $500,000 to the Liberal Party, who is the Liberal Party Treasurer, handing out free flights and other freebies to ministers including Mathias Cormann, who didn't declare it until it came to light. So this really stinks. This whole thing really stinks. It's a serious scandal. It's developing. There are lots of unanswered questions, and it's a test of leadership for Scott Morrison. If he doesn't launch this proper investigation today into Hockey and Cormann and others, then it will be a failure of leadership. It will be a cover up for what has been some very, very serious allegations.
 
GILBERT: But when you look at the ambassador's position, you also have to factor in the fact that he has strong links to Donald Trump, that he's got good relationships with the governors across the United States. Australia was the focus of the Governors' Association national meeting last year when then-Prime Minister Turnbull was in attendance. If you get rid of him, you get rid of those contacts, that's a big loss isn't it, in terms of the diplomatic world? And Mr Shorten's criticised Donald Trump in the past, so he'd want to try to smooth things over.
 
CHALMERS: Well it'll be a decision for the Government; the Government of the day would make those kinds of decisions factoring in all kinds of considerations. But I think it's fair enough for us to say that if some of these allegations are true, and if Joe Hockey is unable to explain in an investigation launched by the Prime Minister his role in all of this, then that's a very serious cloud over him.
 
JAYES: There's no investigation yet. It seemed clear that Scott Morrison wasn't in a mind to do it yesterday. So if he doesn't, will you?
 
CHALMERS: He should do it...
 
JAYES: No, no, but if he doesn't, will you?
 
CHALMERS: Understood. I understand your question. The means available to us aren't the same as the means available to him.
 
JAYES: But you're talking about sacking Joe Hockey if you do win Government. Will you put forward an investigation of your own before you make that call?
 
CHALMERS: We'd make that decision if and when we got to that point. If we won office, we would decide then what we would do about it. I'll give you one example. Just so people understand what's going on here. Scott Morrison in the Parliament yesterday said: "I'm advised Mr Hockey did not instruct staff to meet QBT or any other companies in relation to the tender." But we have an email in Joe Hockey's office that says "Ambassador Hockey has asked that I set up a meeting with you while you're in Washington on Wednesday". This is with the company. So there are very serious questions to answer here; Hockey's involvement, but also Cormann's involvement; I think potentially other ministers involved in freebies and undeclared kickbacks. 
 
GILBERT: The Government has told us that Joe Hockey declared his interest immediately, removed himself from any such meeting. What exactly do you think he did wrong?
 
CHALMERS: Let me read you the rest of the email for you Kieran. "Would you be available at 10.30am? Hopefully the Ambassador can join the meeting, but the Minister Counsellor Justin McPhillips who's in charge of the administration at the embassy will definitely meet with you." I think there are a lot of unanswered questions. I think that what Scott Morrison said yesterday in the Parliament is a real problem for him. Christian Porter, who you had on the show earlier, was doing some other media today and he said he thinks that "I'm sure this matter will be subject of inquiry from the Prime Minister". So we need to see that today. It can't drag on. We can't have the Prime Minister run a protection racket for this kind of behaviour.
 
JAYES: Helloworld has been looking after domestic contracts for travel for departments, for how long? Is this just something that's happened under a Liberal Government?
 
CHALMERS: This tender that we're talking about now they've had for a couple of years...
 
JAYES: And Helloworld haven't won the tenders though that would have been the subject of these conversations, right? It's just part of a process.
 
CHALMERS: Well, there are two tenders that we're talking about. There's the one for domestic travel, which they won. And there's a subsequent one for North American travel, which is the one Joe Hockey intervened in.
 
JAYES: But you don't know whether they actually have these contracts for six years, or did this start under a previous Labor Government?
 
CHALMERS: This current tender is a couple of years old, the one that we're talking about. The one that this Liberal Party donor and Liberal Party Treasurer is a huge beneficiary of. Joe Hockey has shares in the company. The share price went way up after they got this tender.
 
GILBERT: We've got some other issues we need to ask you about, because obviously the modelling on the front page of The Australian in terms of the cost of Labor's emissions reduction target. This is a significant cost according to BAE Economics. What is your response as Shadow Finance Minister to that?
 
CHALMERS: I've seen the reports about the modelling. I don't think that modelling represents the mainstream scientific or economic view about the impact of our policy. Our 45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 has been modelled and the conclusion of that modelling was that wholesale power prices would go down by something like 25 per cent. We'd have jobs created, we'd have cheaper, cleaner energy. So that view that was put on the front of The Australian with the big scary headline, I think the Australian people are sort of over those kind of scare campaigns.
 
GILBERT: This economist has worked for governments of both persuasions. It's someone who knows the field, isn't it?
 
CHALMERS: I don't think his conclusions represent the kind of mainstream conclusions. I think Australians understand, economists understand, scientists understand - the best way to get cheaper, cleaner energy is to invest more in renewables, and that's what we intend to do.
 
JAYES: Have global thermal coal markets collapsed in your view?
 
CHALMERS: I wouldn't use the same language. I wouldn't say that they've collapsed. Coal's a big part of exports out of my home state of Queensland. It has an important role to play.
 
JAYES: You don't say collapsed, but how would you describe it and is it a good thing?
 
CHALMERS: I think the coal industry will play a role into the future. It plays a role now, it will play a role into the future. Even with the transition into renewable energy. I know what you're getting at, and from this seat yesterday, I think Richard has clarified what he said yesterday. He said, I think, as only Richard would, he said he was nowhere near the point he was intending to make. The point that we make is that coal is important, even with the transition to renewable energy. It's important to exports out of Queensland in particular, and that's our view.
 
GILBERT: And on mortgage brokers, will you adopt the Hayne recommendations in full, or not? 
 
CHALMERS: We've said from the beginning that we accept in principle all of the recommendations of the Royal Commission, and that includes the conclusion that mortgage broker fees can be fixed up. There are issues there that need to be addressed. We've been engaging with the mortgage brokers. I have personally; Chris Bowen has; Clare O'Neil - all of our members of Parliament have been engaging really constructively with mortgage brokers, and we have been listening to their concerns. We've been giving them the same message publicly and privately that we think they're an important part of the system, and that they're especially good for competition. So if there are better ways to fix up the fee structure for mortgage brokers, then obviously we would look at those, because what we want to see are the recommendations of Hayne implemented, and where we can do better we will, and we'll have more to say.
 
GILBERT: But you won't do it exactly as he suggested? You're willing to soften those? Because as you know, the mortgage brokers have told you, they've told us, they've told everyone basically that this would end their business model. 
 
CHALMERS: And we don't want to see that. We don't want to see the end of mortgage brokers. They've got an important role to play in the system, particularly as it relates to competition. So we've told them publicly and privately we don't want to do anything that sees the end of their part of the industry. There may be better ways for us to fix up the problems that Hayne rightly identifies in the fee structure for mortgage brokers.
 
JAYES: Jim Chalmers, thanks so much for your time this morning. 
 
ENDS